I'd say that it is a better package for Cleveland then the original one, but if Boston re-signs Irving and the BKN pick doesn't turn into a superstar it was a clear win by Boston. However, a superstar from the BKN pick or Irving leaving in free agency and the trade is definitely altered a bit.

If we prune out the dead weight, this boils down to Irving for Hill, Hood, Clarkson, Nance and the BKN 1st. We still need to see how the chips are going to fall this offseason, but it doesn't seem like a great return squarely on talent. Remember that the Cavs were hoping for the likes of Eric Gordon, Kemba Walker, and DeAndre Jordan.

Hood still has a chance to be as good as those guys. Probably doesn't get there, but he has made pretty decent production jumps every single season he has been in the league. Hill is older, but is a much better fit next to James than any of those players. Great shooter, plus defender, plays well off the ball, etc. Clarkson and Nance are both solid role players.

Not a super great return for Irving, but I just think the new package is a much better fit overall for the Cavs. They got some much needed youth on their bench which comprises on the whole better shooting and defense then what they had.

We overpaid for the Irving deal in August IMO, and even now it looks that way.

They aren't all-stars, but Hood, Clarkson, etc are very solid players and the Nets Pick will likely be somewhere in the 6-8 range.

How? Kyrie is better than anyone CLE got back for Crowder and IT. In the NBA, 4 quarters does not equal a dollar.

And two of those quarters are on long-term inflated contracts (and Hood is about to be). I applaud Utah for turning an expiring Hood into a bargain priced Crowder - I bet Memphis wishes they could have done that with Evans. And how Sacramento ever convinced Cleveland to take back $37M in salary for the aging Hill for $11M in salary for Shumpert is beyond me.

At this point, we root for Kyrie to continue his rise into superstardom (and hope the BKN pick is a dud...just out of spite!).

I think I read somewhere that even if Lebron leaves, the Cavaliers would STILL be over the cap and would hit large luxury tax numbers again if they want to re-sign Hood, etc.

Whether Kyrie re-signs with us or not does impact the long term value of the trade but in any case, we have a better chance, perhaps much better chance, to re-sign him than if we didn't trade for him. So there is value there either way. Plus he did waive his trade kicker which is a pretty good indication of his intentions. Intentions can change but I think he intends to stay. And he has played and fit in better than most thought.

As for what we gave up, IT, Crowder, Zizic, BNK pick, all of them have less current value than the perceived value at the time of the trade. This is subjective admittedly but still pretty clear.

As for what CLE was able to flip them for, can you imagine that we would have traded IT, Crowder, and Zizic for Hill, Clarkson, and say Nance (it is impossible to completely match this up). This is somewhat comparable value if you know that IT is not going to be close to 100% all season but otherwise, no way.

I'd say that it is a better package for Cleveland then the original one, but if Boston re-signs Irving and the BKN pick doesn't turn into a superstar it was a clear win by Boston. However, a superstar from the BKN pick or Irving leaving in free agency and the trade is definitely altered a bit.

If we prune out the dead weight, this boils down to Irving for Hill, Hood, Clarkson, Nance and the BKN 1st. We still need to see how the chips are going to fall this offseason, but it doesn't seem like a great return squarely on talent. Remember that the Cavs were hoping for the likes of Eric Gordon, Kemba Walker, and DeAndre Jordan.

Hood still has a chance to be as good as those guys. Probably doesn't get there, but he has made pretty decent production jumps every single season he has been in the league. Hill is older, but is a much better fit next to James than any of those players. Great shooter, plus defender, plays well off the ball, etc. Clarkson and Nance are both solid role players.

Not a super great return for Irving, but I just think the new package is a much better fit overall for the Cavs. They got some much needed youth on their bench which comprises on the whole better shooting and defense then what they had.

We overpaid for the Irving deal in August IMO, and even now it looks that way.

They aren't all-stars, but Hood, Clarkson, etc are very solid players and the Nets Pick will likely be somewhere in the 6-8 range.

How? Kyrie is better than anyone CLE got back for Crowder and IT. In the NBA, 4 quarters does not equal a dollar.

Well Zizic is a promising prospect, BKN Pick is likely becoming Top 10, and at the time Crowder looked solid and Isaiah was coming off an MVP-caliber season.

Now yeah, we didn't find out about Isaiah's injury extent until much later, but it still looked like an overpay at the time.

The deal certainly looks better now, but it depends on three major things.

1.) Does BKN Pick land Top 5? Top 3???

2.) Do Cavaliers win Finals this year with Hood, Clarkson, Hill, Nance as key parts?

3.) Does Kyrie bolt in 2 years when he hits FA, or will he sign a long term extension here?

1) We traded the BRK pick figuring it would be top 5. If it lands there I don't see how that changes anything. The only way the value of the BRK pick can go from the moment we traded it is down. Right now its in 7th.

2) The Cavs gave up a lot more than just IT and Crowder to get Clarkson, Hood, Hill, and Nance. So substituting those 4 players dor IT and Crowder into our trade with Cleveland is disingenuous. Maybe substitute just Clarkson and Nance as salaries are close.

3) Though Kyrie could bolt, I doubt he will. Boston is his team now and contenders. That's what he wanted and why he forced himself out of Cleveland.

I'd say that it is a better package for Cleveland then the original one, but if Boston re-signs Irving and the BKN pick doesn't turn into a superstar it was a clear win by Boston. However, a superstar from the BKN pick or Irving leaving in free agency and the trade is definitely altered a bit.

If we prune out the dead weight, this boils down to Irving for Hill, Hood, Clarkson, Nance and the BKN 1st. We still need to see how the chips are going to fall this offseason, but it doesn't seem like a great return squarely on talent. Remember that the Cavs were hoping for the likes of Eric Gordon, Kemba Walker, and DeAndre Jordan.

Hood still has a chance to be as good as those guys. Probably doesn't get there, but he has made pretty decent production jumps every single season he has been in the league. Hill is older, but is a much better fit next to James than any of those players. Great shooter, plus defender, plays well off the ball, etc. Clarkson and Nance are both solid role players.

Not a super great return for Irving, but I just think the new package is a much better fit overall for the Cavs. They got some much needed youth on their bench which comprises on the whole better shooting and defense then what they had.

We overpaid for the Irving deal in August IMO, and even now it looks that way.

They aren't all-stars, but Hood, Clarkson, etc are very solid players and the Nets Pick will likely be somewhere in the 6-8 range.

How? Kyrie is better than anyone CLE got back for Crowder and IT. In the NBA, 4 quarters does not equal a dollar.

Well Zizic is a promising prospect, BKN Pick is likely becoming Top 10, and at the time Crowder looked solid and Isaiah was coming off an MVP-caliber season.

Now yeah, we didn't find out about Isaiah's injury extent until much later, but it still looked like an overpay at the time.

The deal certainly looks better now, but it depends on three major things.

1.) Does BKN Pick land Top 5? Top 3???

2.) Do Cavaliers win Finals this year with Hood, Clarkson, Hill, Nance as key parts?

3.) Does Kyrie bolt in 2 years when he hits FA, or will he sign a long term extension here?

1) We traded the BRK pick figuring it would be top 5. If it lands there I don't see how that changes anything. The only way the value of the BRK pick can go from the moment we traded it is down. Right now its in 7th.

2) The Cavs gave up a lot more than just IT and Crowder to get Clarkson, Hood, Hill, and Nance. So substituting those 4 players dor IT and Crowder into our trade with Cleveland is disingenuous. Maybe substitute just Clarkson and Nance as salaries are close.

3) Though Kyrie could bolt, I doubt he will. Boston is his team now and contenders. That's what he wanted and why he forced himself out of Cleveland.

I'm not sure Shumpert, Frye, Rose, and a late 1st round pick can actually be called a lot more.

I'd say that it is a better package for Cleveland then the original one, but if Boston re-signs Irving and the BKN pick doesn't turn into a superstar it was a clear win by Boston. However, a superstar from the BKN pick or Irving leaving in free agency and the trade is definitely altered a bit.

If we prune out the dead weight, this boils down to Irving for Hill, Hood, Clarkson, Nance and the BKN 1st. We still need to see how the chips are going to fall this offseason, but it doesn't seem like a great return squarely on talent. Remember that the Cavs were hoping for the likes of Eric Gordon, Kemba Walker, and DeAndre Jordan.

Hood still has a chance to be as good as those guys. Probably doesn't get there, but he has made pretty decent production jumps every single season he has been in the league. Hill is older, but is a much better fit next to James than any of those players. Great shooter, plus defender, plays well off the ball, etc. Clarkson and Nance are both solid role players.

Not a super great return for Irving, but I just think the new package is a much better fit overall for the Cavs. They got some much needed youth on their bench which comprises on the whole better shooting and defense then what they had.

We overpaid for the Irving deal in August IMO, and even now it looks that way.

They aren't all-stars, but Hood, Clarkson, etc are very solid players and the Nets Pick will likely be somewhere in the 6-8 range.

How? Kyrie is better than anyone CLE got back for Crowder and IT. In the NBA, 4 quarters does not equal a dollar.

Well Zizic is a promising prospect, BKN Pick is likely becoming Top 10, and at the time Crowder looked solid and Isaiah was coming off an MVP-caliber season.

Now yeah, we didn't find out about Isaiah's injury extent until much later, but it still looked like an overpay at the time.

The deal certainly looks better now, but it depends on three major things.

1.) Does BKN Pick land Top 5? Top 3???

2.) Do Cavaliers win Finals this year with Hood, Clarkson, Hill, Nance as key parts?

3.) Does Kyrie bolt in 2 years when he hits FA, or will he sign a long term extension here?

1) We traded the BRK pick figuring it would be top 5. If it lands there I don't see how that changes anything. The only way the value of the BRK pick can go from the moment we traded it is down. Right now its in 7th.

2) The Cavs gave up a lot more than just IT and Crowder to get Clarkson, Hood, Hill, and Nance. So substituting those 4 players dor IT and Crowder into our trade with Cleveland is disingenuous. Maybe substitute just Clarkson and Nance as salaries are close.

3) Though Kyrie could bolt, I doubt he will. Boston is his team now and contenders. That's what he wanted and why he forced himself out of Cleveland.

I'm not sure Shumpert, Frye, Rose, and a late 1st round pick can actually be called a lot more.

That's a first rounder and a bunch of salary. No way IT and Crowder's salary brings in all four guys Cleveland brought in. So yeah, that's a lot more.

I'd say that it is a better package for Cleveland then the original one, but if Boston re-signs Irving and the BKN pick doesn't turn into a superstar it was a clear win by Boston. However, a superstar from the BKN pick or Irving leaving in free agency and the trade is definitely altered a bit.

If we prune out the dead weight, this boils down to Irving for Hill, Hood, Clarkson, Nance and the BKN 1st. We still need to see how the chips are going to fall this offseason, but it doesn't seem like a great return squarely on talent. Remember that the Cavs were hoping for the likes of Eric Gordon, Kemba Walker, and DeAndre Jordan.

Hood still has a chance to be as good as those guys. Probably doesn't get there, but he has made pretty decent production jumps every single season he has been in the league. Hill is older, but is a much better fit next to James than any of those players. Great shooter, plus defender, plays well off the ball, etc. Clarkson and Nance are both solid role players.

Not a super great return for Irving, but I just think the new package is a much better fit overall for the Cavs. They got some much needed youth on their bench which comprises on the whole better shooting and defense then what they had.

We overpaid for the Irving deal in August IMO, and even now it looks that way.

They aren't all-stars, but Hood, Clarkson, etc are very solid players and the Nets Pick will likely be somewhere in the 6-8 range.

How? Kyrie is better than anyone CLE got back for Crowder and IT. In the NBA, 4 quarters does not equal a dollar.

Well Zizic is a promising prospect, BKN Pick is likely becoming Top 10, and at the time Crowder looked solid and Isaiah was coming off an MVP-caliber season.

Now yeah, we didn't find out about Isaiah's injury extent until much later, but it still looked like an overpay at the time.

The deal certainly looks better now, but it depends on three major things.

1.) Does BKN Pick land Top 5? Top 3???

2.) Do Cavaliers win Finals this year with Hood, Clarkson, Hill, Nance as key parts?

3.) Does Kyrie bolt in 2 years when he hits FA, or will he sign a long term extension here?

1) We traded the BRK pick figuring it would be top 5. If it lands there I don't see how that changes anything. The only way the value of the BRK pick can go from the moment we traded it is down. Right now its in 7th.

2) The Cavs gave up a lot more than just IT and Crowder to get Clarkson, Hood, Hill, and Nance. So substituting those 4 players dor IT and Crowder into our trade with Cleveland is disingenuous. Maybe substitute just Clarkson and Nance as salaries are close.

3) Though Kyrie could bolt, I doubt he will. Boston is his team now and contenders. That's what he wanted and why he forced himself out of Cleveland.

I'm not sure Shumpert, Frye, Rose, and a late 1st round pick can actually be called a lot more.

That's a first rounder and a bunch of salary. No way IT and Crowder's salary brings in all four guys Cleveland brought in. So yeah, that's a lot more.

a late 1st and a bunch of mostly useless salary (Frye is ok, but a bench player, the other guys weren't even playing in Cleveland). Sure they needed that salary to take back the salary they did, but it wasn't like it was salary from valuable or useful players. The Cavs could have literally traded anyone that made those salaries and the trades would have still happened.

Whether Kyrie re-signs with us or not does impact the long term value of the trade but in any case, we have a better chance, perhaps much better chance, to re-sign him than if we didn't trade for him. So there is value there either way. Plus he did waive his trade kicker which is a pretty good indication of his intentions. Intentions can change but I think he intends to stay. And he has played and fit in better than most thought.

As for what we gave up, IT, Crowder, Zizic, BNK pick, all of them have less current value than the perceived value at the time of the trade. This is subjective admittedly but still pretty clear.

As for what CLE was able to flip them for, can you imagine that we would have traded IT, Crowder, and Zizic for Hill, Clarkson, and say Nance (it is impossible to completely match this up). This is somewhat comparable value if you know that IT is not going to be close to 100% all season but otherwise, no way.

Does Zizic even get any playing time in CLE these days?? Even when they were getting blown out in games before... he never seemed to get it.

Whether Kyrie re-signs with us or not does impact the long term value of the trade but in any case, we have a better chance, perhaps much better chance, to re-sign him than if we didn't trade for him. So there is value there either way. Plus he did waive his trade kicker which is a pretty good indication of his intentions. Intentions can change but I think he intends to stay. And he has played and fit in better than most thought.

As for what we gave up, IT, Crowder, Zizic, BNK pick, all of them have less current value than the perceived value at the time of the trade. This is subjective admittedly but still pretty clear.

As for what CLE was able to flip them for, can you imagine that we would have traded IT, Crowder, and Zizic for Hill, Clarkson, and say Nance (it is impossible to completely match this up). This is somewhat comparable value if you know that IT is not going to be close to 100% all season but otherwise, no way.

Does Zizic even get any playing time in CLE these days?? Even when they were getting blown out in games before... he never seemed to get it.

No and they were very very thin up front at times. He looks like a bust, glad we are not having him here feeling disappointed.

I'd say that it is a better package for Cleveland then the original one, but if Boston re-signs Irving and the BKN pick doesn't turn into a superstar it was a clear win by Boston. However, a superstar from the BKN pick or Irving leaving in free agency and the trade is definitely altered a bit.

If we prune out the dead weight, this boils down to Irving for Hill, Hood, Clarkson, Nance and the BKN 1st. We still need to see how the chips are going to fall this offseason, but it doesn't seem like a great return squarely on talent. Remember that the Cavs were hoping for the likes of Eric Gordon, Kemba Walker, and DeAndre Jordan.

Hood still has a chance to be as good as those guys. Probably doesn't get there, but he has made pretty decent production jumps every single season he has been in the league. Hill is older, but is a much better fit next to James than any of those players. Great shooter, plus defender, plays well off the ball, etc. Clarkson and Nance are both solid role players.

Not a super great return for Irving, but I just think the new package is a much better fit overall for the Cavs. They got some much needed youth on their bench which comprises on the whole better shooting and defense then what they had.

We overpaid for the Irving deal in August IMO, and even now it looks that way.

They aren't all-stars, but Hood, Clarkson, etc are very solid players and the Nets Pick will likely be somewhere in the 6-8 range.

How? Kyrie is better than anyone CLE got back for Crowder and IT. In the NBA, 4 quarters does not equal a dollar.

Well Zizic is a promising prospect, BKN Pick is likely becoming Top 10, and at the time Crowder looked solid and Isaiah was coming off an MVP-caliber season.

Now yeah, we didn't find out about Isaiah's injury extent until much later, but it still looked like an overpay at the time.

The deal certainly looks better now, but it depends on three major things.

1.) Does BKN Pick land Top 5? Top 3???

2.) Do Cavaliers win Finals this year with Hood, Clarkson, Hill, Nance as key parts?

3.) Does Kyrie bolt in 2 years when he hits FA, or will he sign a long term extension here?

1) We traded the BRK pick figuring it would be top 5. If it lands there I don't see how that changes anything. The only way the value of the BRK pick can go from the moment we traded it is down. Right now its in 7th.

2) The Cavs gave up a lot more than just IT and Crowder to get Clarkson, Hood, Hill, and Nance. So substituting those 4 players dor IT and Crowder into our trade with Cleveland is disingenuous. Maybe substitute just Clarkson and Nance as salaries are close.

3) Though Kyrie could bolt, I doubt he will. Boston is his team now and contenders. That's what he wanted and why he forced himself out of Cleveland.

I'm not sure Shumpert, Frye, Rose, and a late 1st round pick can actually be called a lot more.

That's a first rounder and a bunch of salary. No way IT and Crowder's salary brings in all four guys Cleveland brought in. So yeah, that's a lot more.

a late 1st and a bunch of mostly useless salary (Frye is ok, but a bench player, the other guys weren't even playing in Cleveland). Sure they needed that salary to take back the salary they did, but it wasn't like it was salary from valuable or useful players. The Cavs could have literally traded anyone that made those salaries and the trades would have still happened.

But those players and salary didn't come from the Celtics in the Kyrie trade so you can't really say all 4 guys are a replacement for IT and Crowder when doing substitution for them when analyzing the Kyrie trade.

Whether Kyrie re-signs with us or not does impact the long term value of the trade but in any case, we have a better chance, perhaps much better chance, to re-sign him than if we didn't trade for him. So there is value there either way. Plus he did waive his trade kicker which is a pretty good indication of his intentions. Intentions can change but I think he intends to stay. And he has played and fit in better than most thought.

As for what we gave up, IT, Crowder, Zizic, BNK pick, all of them have less current value than the perceived value at the time of the trade. This is subjective admittedly but still pretty clear.

As for what CLE was able to flip them for, can you imagine that we would have traded IT, Crowder, and Zizic for Hill, Clarkson, and say Nance (it is impossible to completely match this up). This is somewhat comparable value if you know that IT is not going to be close to 100% all season but otherwise, no way.

Does Zizic even get any playing time in CLE these days?? Even when they were getting blown out in games before... he never seemed to get it.

No and they were very very thin up front at times. He looks like a bust, glad we are not having him here feeling disappointed.

Lol most here (including me) thought he'd be our "temporary answer" at center as a rotation big, but yikes... he may be at least 1-2 years away still.

How are people grading this trade taking into account what the Cavs did at the trade deadline??? That has NOTHING to do with our trade. You should ONLY be grading the trade made between the Celtics and Cavs.

The Cavs were able to make some nice moves with some pieces they got from our trade but that should have ZERO affect on the grade of OUR trade.

If you want to play that game, then it would be infinite and the grade of the trade will never be known.

Trade = A. I wanted to keep BK and give LAL/SAC at the time, then it seemed genius, now it seemed correct. But Kyrie is amazing, I cant wait to see him in the playoffs. Especially next year with Gordon and another big piece (hopefully)